Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2017 (12) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2017 (12) TMI 28 - AT - Service Tax


Issues:
- Appeal against refund claims sanctioned by the Commissioner (Appeals)
- Validity of refund claims filed by the respondent
- Examination of relevant documents for refund claims
- Entitlement of the respondent for service tax refund
- Precedent set by Redico Khaitan Limited Vs. CST

Analysis:
The judgment involves an appeal by the Revenue against the refund claims sanctioned by the Commissioner (Appeals). The respondent, a builder, received advances from prospective buyers for flats but later canceled the agreements, refunding the amounts along with service tax. The Revenue contended that relevant documents were not provided for the refund claims and presumed no refunds were made. The respondent argued that all necessary documents were submitted, and the Commissioner (Appeals) rightly approved the refunds as no services were rendered to the buyers. The judge noted that the Revenue failed to consider the documents submitted by the respondent, leading to unnecessary litigation. The judge emphasized that the Revenue should not file appeals based on presumptions without verifying facts.

The judge highlighted the Revenue's presumption that refunds were not made to buyers without proper verification. Referring to the case of Redico Khaitan Limited Vs. CST, where it was ruled that refunding advances along with service tax amounts to non-provision of services, the judge supported the respondent's entitlement to claim the service tax paid. The judge concluded that the Commissioner (Appeals) correctly sanctioned the refunds, finding no errors in the decision. Consequently, the judge dismissed the Revenue's appeals, upholding the orders in favor of the respondent.

In summary, the judgment addressed the issues of verifying relevant documents for refund claims, the entitlement of the respondent for service tax refund, and the precedent set by a previous case. It emphasized the importance of considering all evidence before filing appeals and upheld the decision to grant refunds to the respondent based on the facts presented.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates